[slackline]

Can we copy it here if we promise not to change the wording? 

[RockArchivist]

Grow up.

[grimer]

Phil don't take the cracking on here too seriously. It's not necessarily funny or well judged but it's hardly ever meant in a bad way.

It's not grown up, and that's often the point.

Anyway, keep up the good work on the site. Will listen to that interview in a bit.

[Johnny Brown]

Nice one Phil, that's really interesting.

[grimer]

god, every time I go to visit sites like rockarchivist I've forgotten my password, then when i try to register it says my username's taken then when i try to find my user name it doesn't exist so then i just give up.

I fucking hate the modern world. It's so fucking awfully designed.

[slackline]

Grow up.

  The use of an emoticon was indicative of a childish joke.  (Besides, its still not clear to me why you think an article credited as being written by Nick Colton over which you expressed disdain for its tweaking when pasted into these forums was your work?)

For those interested Phil's work can be found at http://www.rockarchivist.co.uk/ and the particular series of interviews with Andy Pollitt that he is referring to are here (although you will have to sign-in/register and agree to the sites terms and conditions before you can access the excellent material).

(Wonderful things these "hyper-links" )

Keep up the good work Mr Kelly.

[SA Chris]

god, every time I go to visit sites like rockarchivist I've forgotten my password

every time I visit Rock Archivist I find hours of my day just disappear. It's fascinating reading, and an excellent website.

[RockArchivist]

(Besides, its still not clear to me why you think an article credited as being written by Nick Colton over which you expressed disdain for its tweaking when pasted into these forums was your work?)

Because Nick didn't write it, but you weren't to know that.

[RockArchivist]

P0rnography? - Our work firewall does the same to me as well!

[slackline]

(Besides, its still not clear to me why you think an article credited as being written by Nick Colton over which you expressed disdain for its tweaking when pasted into these forums was your work?)

Because Nick didn't write it, but you weren't to know that.

No I wasn't, because I went by the credit at the end of the article which is clearly stated at the bottom as "By Nick Colton".  Perhaps you should contact the BMC and ask them to rectify this and attribute authorship to yourself?

P.S. - There is a "Preview" function that can save you having to come back and modify posts.

[RockArchivist]

I don't know why you're dragging this all up again unless it's to simply generate more forum posts...

Regardless of who wrote what, it got changed. End of. Move on - I have.

[RockArchivist]

>> P.S. - There is a "Preview" function that can save you having to come back and modify posts.

What?

[slackline]

I don't know why you're dragging this all up again unless it's to simply generate more forum posts...

  Not sure why you think I might need to generate more forum posts, I post plenty of crap as it is (check the post counts underneath avatars).

Anyway, you never answered my original question as to why you asserted authorship over a piece that was attributed to someone else in the first place (check the old thread, you popped up said "Oi' don't change my words" and never responded as to who it was directed at or why you were claiming authorship over an article that was attributed to someone else).

In light of that I made a puerile joke this morning after your second post on these forums (don't forget UKB has a reputation to maintain on this front), and you have now kindly explained that there is an error on the BMC site as to the author of the article.  Because you didn't like having your words mis-represented here it would seem logical (to me) that you would want to have your words correctly attributed on the BMC article to yourself as author too (particularly given the strong copyright assertions that you make over the content of the rockarchivist.co.uk).

Regardless of who wrote what, it got changed. End of. Move on - I have.

Actually it didn't (the reference to "assimilation" in the copied text is still there, and the BMC site still indicates the article was by Nick Colton).  As you've moved on though it doesn't matter.

P.S.  - I can be something of a stickler for finer details.

[Jim]

P.S.  - I can be something of a stickler for finer details.

NO SHIT!!!! 

[Johnny Brown]

Jesus.



Be nice to have someone like Phil's perspective on here - lets not put him off eh?

[cofe]

word to that.

[Falling Down]

Amen to that

[slackline]

P.S. - There is a "Preview" function that can save you having to come back and modify posts.

What?

thesiger kindly modified one of your posts (without changing the words) so that the quote you had made was correct and provided context.

[fatdoc]

 

with JB

[GCW]

I wish a (relatively) serious thread about repeats didn't keep getting gunged up with BS.

[slackline]

Not (intentionally) trying to put anyone off, apologies if its come across that way.

I'll have to consider carefully in the future if puerile jokes are appropriate depending on the person it is being aimed at (if I can come up with some way of gauging the temperament of people over the internet).

Believe it or not I am purposefully refraining from several approaches to posting that I frequently used (e.g. telling people to use search functions/linking to lmgtfy).

I wish a (relatively) serious thread about repeats didn't keep getting gunged up with BS.

Syphon it all off to the log-pile (if anyone can be bothered), its where it belongs.

[RockArchivist]

Let's just take this offline. No need for it.

Please remember though that all I was bloody trying to do was to bring your collective attention to the Pollitt interviews etc - I was clearly wrong in doing so, for which I obviously apologise.

I'm also sorry my complete lack of a sense of humour has brought this topic down to this level. It *will* happen again.

Now then, life....